LATEST CHATTY HEADER
Subscribe to Shacknews Mercury starting at $1/month!
Chrome Shack Community Guidelines Chatty Search
Scroll down to join the conversation.
New to Shacknews? Signup for a Free Account
Already have an account? Login Now
Subscribe to Shacknews Mercury starting at $1/month!
Chrome Shack Community Guidelines Chatty Search
Scroll down to join the conversation.
there has been much debate about this, and are they "too much?"
At first i was like "fuck the haters" because we spend all this money on our PCs and finally a game comes a long that actually justifies that expense. A hardcore, fuck the newbs, system-killing game.
All praise Crytek. Raise the bar and all that shit.
But then again, I was able to play EP2, Portal, Bioshock and Cod4 at 1920x1200 with everything maxed at 60fps, and I liked it.
Crysis? I have to play at 1600x1200 with a mixture of medium and high settings, and it runs at about 30fps. It's playable, but barely.
So on the one hand I praise the move to the next gen and how it will really push technology. But on the other hand I wish it was a bit less demanding and ran better on very high end systems like my own.
So I'm conflicted.
Thread Truncated. Click to see all 147 replies.
Also I can run it well. The game chokes no matter what, period. I have separately played it on a top-end quad core with two 8800-series cards in SLI, on a machine with 4GB of RAM, and it chokes during the same parts. The game is enormously demanding.
Good question, where will I be in three years? It is an interesting philosophical point. I guess.
The post has been reported. Thank you!
You must be logged in to post.
You must be logged in to post.